Twin Ancient Cultures On Opposite Sides Of The Pacific

Originally posted by Harte

Tell me about it! I'm pretty tired of having to do so too.

You could just give in and embrace the Dark Side.

But, sometimes fantasies come true. I remember this one time, back in the dorm at the University of Georgia...

Harte

Twins I hope.

And here's a fitting quote, which I would respectfully like to remind everyone, that best demonstrates the way in which we should view such people as Barry Fell. We all have failings.

"I have no personal doubts that some of the inscriptions which have been reported are genuine Celtic ogham. Despite my occasional harsh criticism of Fell's treatment of individual inscriptions, it should be recognized that without Fell's work there would be no ogham problem to perplex us. We need to ask not only what Fell has done wrong in his epigraphy, but also where we have gone wrong as archaeologists in not recognizing such an extensive European presence in the New World."
(Kelley, David H.; "Proto-Tifinagh and Proto-Ogham in the Americas," Review of Archaeology, 11:1, 1990.)

A fine statement. Celtic BC American contact, and kudo-sort of remark for a questionable fellow named Barry Fell.

So, where we're we?????

Gold was previously noted. What about Silver?

The Silver Mining in Nevada link at Wiki, is clear, again Nevada is number 2 in producing silver in North America.

Silver mining in Nevada, a state of the United States, began in 1858 with the discovery of the Comstock Lode, the first major silver-mining district in the United States. Nevada calls itself the "Silver State." In 2006, Nevada was the nation's second-largest producer of silver, after Alaska.[1]

In the Major Mines of Nevada 2006 report it is noted the figures for 2006.

Gold 6,310,000 ounces Silver 8,494,000 ounces Copper 127,554,000 pounds

All coming from this one small state, and sought by Solomon and his allies in this venture.

So, we can see one thing is clear in respects to Nevada. The goods are here. All of the goods.

It's all about Location, Location, Location.

Now, "IF" this travel suggested earlier occurred at all, how would they get there?

Well, we have established many things right now. Solomon had the Phoenicians Sailing his ships. Egypt was an Ally, as was Libya.

To me, the simplest method would be the Atlantic Crossing. The Currents to the Caribbean are favorable.

Speculating????? Sure, I am. Don't you think? ( Not an Personal Attack, just a query in passing )

Everything thing is there, except the "Carved in Stone" Stele.

Does it take that though? Will other "Indicators" appear, to at least lend credence to premise of Cross Atlantic Contact.

How about 7000 Years ago? Is that a good starting point?

The Red Paint People. Public TV recently aired a program on North America's Red Paint People, so-called because they added brilliant red iron oxide to their graves. It also seems they knew how to sail the deep ocean, as G.F. Carter now relates.

"Decades ago, Gutorn Gjessing pointed out that the identical [Red Paint] culture was found in Norway. No one paid much attention to that, but more recent carbon-14 dating has shown that the identical cultures had identical dates, and people began to pay more attention. It is now admitted that this is a high latitude culture that obviously sailed the stormy north Atlantic and stretched from northwest Europe over to America. It seemingly extends from along the Atlantic coast of Europe to America and in America from the high latitudes of Labrador down into New York state.
"The dates are mind-boggling: 7,000 years ago both in Europe and America. That is 2,000 years earlier than the Great Pyramids of Egypt. It is at least 4,000 years earlier than the Mound Builders of the Ohio Valley. The evidence is cummulative, varied in nature, and most probably highly reliable."

(Carter, George F.; "Before Columbus," Ellsworth American, November 23, 1990. Cr. R. Strong.)

I find this fascinating. Pre-Pyramid ( if you believe all that Kufu hogwash ), ?

Is this evidence that indicates further on the OP's premise put forth in this Thread? In this Case, the SAME Cultural practices half a world away, separated by only one thing. The Vast Highway that was in the middle. The Atlantic Ocean.

We'll talk about Copper in the next area, along with other things Native to here.

Ciao

Shane

So, there's mines in Nevada and that means Solom mined there too?

Plenty of gold in the Appalachians in Solomon's day, you know.

So, why'd you pick Nevada?

Harte

reply to post by WarminIndy


I am glad to see you fighting the Good Fight based on this aspect of the Discussion. I don't particularly have the patience to deal with the "Unseen" claims based in genetics. I like the stuff found "on the ground" better.

But with that said, I have seen some comments and suppositions submitted that suggest Europa and it's people seemingly have NO interaction with the Amerindians.

I find this amusing to say the least, but again, that is based on things left behind.

Regardless, I was reviewing material, and found the following to be contrary to some of the assertions others have made, and contrary to what even has been presented to dismiss what has been presented.

I think it echos Your earlier Post.

Genetic similarities between Europeans and American Indians

Archaeologists are just beginning to realize that to understand European prehistory, American prehistory must also be considered. The Solutreans of Spain are now believed to have crossed the Atlantic using the southern Equatorial current and entered the Caribbean and Central America between 18,000 and 12,000 years ago to become known as the Clovis hunters of America. Recent genetic findings suggest that the people now known as Gaelic speaking Celts (including Irish, Welsh, Scots, Basques and Berbers) are a remnant of a group of people who also left Spain between 1,8000 and 12,000 years ago and spent 6,000 years isolated from Europe before returning, bringing the Megalithic culture to coastal Europe.

Geneticist Prof Steve Jones, who recently published a book called Y - The Descent of Man, said;
"Genetics provided more reliable clues to the distant past than language did". He and colleagues at University College, London, have spent years creating a genetic map of the Y chromosome, which is passed by males from generation to generation. The results show that the Welsh are related to the Basques of northern Spain and southern France and to native Americans. He said: "There has been much less interbreeding in Wales than you might expect. Wales and Ireland have the most homogenous group of males of anywhere in the world, from the research that's been done so far".

He said; "The Y chromosome common among Welsh males was an ancient one. Most native Americans have the same one. Surprisingly perhaps, the genetics show that the Welsh are not related to the Cornish, despite the similarity of their languages. The Cornish are in effect Anglo-Saxons who for a time used a language that was hanging around. The genes of Scottish males betrayed considerable inter-mixing with outsiders".

James Wilson and Prof David Goldstein of University College London, with colleagues at Oxford University and the University of California, found that Welsh and Irishmen are genetic blood-brothers of the Basque people.
"The findings provide the first direct evidence of a close relationship between the people known as Celts and the Basques. The gene patterns of three races passed down through the male line are all strikingly similar, researchers concluded. Basques can trace their roots back to the Stone Age and are one of Europe's most distinct people, fiercely proud of their ancestry and traditions.

The team looked for similarities between the Y chromosomes (which are only carried by men) they sampled DNA from; 88 “Celtic fringe” individuals from Anglesey, North Wales, 146 from Ireland with Irish Gaelic surnames, and 150 Basques, revealing “remarkable' similarities. On the other hand, he and his colleagues compared Celtic and Norwegian populations and found them to be quite different.

The Celts carried the early Y chromosome, which provides the first clear evidence of a close relationship in the paternal heritage of Basque and Celtic speaking populations. “They were statistically indistinguishable', we also noticed that there's something quite striking about the Celtic populations, and that is that there's not a lot of genetic variation on the male Y-chromosome, We conclude that both the Basques and Celts are reflecting pre-farming Europe. Somehow these people have remained in isolation from the rest of Europe up until the Bronze age where their genes begin to indicate an influx of female genes from mainland Europe" said Prof Goldstein.

The other scenario is that these people were not living in Europe, but were in the Caribbean, the East Coast of America and on islands in the Atlantic.

I found this was in contrast to what Johnny offered in his Pie Chart, that was supposed.....

Here are distinct Euro Centric Peoples being tested, with results that seem to point to a period of time when they also inhabited the Americas. That's two, if the Red Painted Peoples can be considered one.

There is more, and it can be reviewed at Ancient America where the above was found.

Ciao

Shane

reply to post by Harte


I didn't "Pick" Nevada. God did, when he created the Planet and placed the Gold / Silver / and source of Copper there. I had very little to do with any of that.

Speaking of Copper, there is a remarkable site, that should also be presented in this effort to suggest the OP's Thread has merit and that it is viable, both of these Cultures had (or quite plausibly had) interaction which explains the reasoning behind such Constructional Similarities.

Copper it appears was also removed ENMASSE from Isle Royale, an island in Lake Superior. Part of Michigan, just off the Border of Canada.

Copper: a world trade in 3000 BC?

Europe’s economy between 2000 and 1000 BC stood and fell with copper, used for the creation of bronze. At the same time, large quantities of copper were mined in America, though no-one seems to know who was using it. A question of a world economy, and supply and demand?

Philip Coppens

The following is what has been found out about this Island.

About 5000 mines have been discovered, in an area that is roughly 200 kilometres long and five to ten kilometres wide. The area mined on Isle Royale measures sixty to eight kilometres. If all mines were placed in one consecutive row, it would measure eight kilometres, eight metres wide and ten metres deep.

Every mine that was opened in the past 200 years, showed some previous, prehistoric mining activity. This included mines where the copper ore did not protrude to the surface – showing evidence of the advanced knowledge which allowed the prehistoric miners to identify subterranean ores. It also worked the other way around, for sites that showed evidence of ancient mining, were in modern times considered to be good omens, as they were often the best sites to find copper – lots of copper.

How the miners knew which stones contained copper is a mystery. They obviously did, but where they learned, is not known. As it is not known who was responsible for the activity. Furthermore, if there were no transoceanic contacts, is it not highly remarkable that both continents, completely independent from each other, at the same moment in time, began to mine and use copper and tin, used it to create bronze, yet in America, did nothing “sensible” with it – apart from some artefacts that have been recovered?

The Menomonie Indians of north Wisconsin possess a legend that speaks about the ancient mines. They described the mines as being worked by “light skinned men”, who were able to identify the mines by throwing magical stones on the ground, which made the ores that contained copper ring like a bell.

This practice closely resembles a similar practice that was used in Europe during the Bronze Age. Bronze with a high concentration of tin indeed resonates when a stone is thrown against it. The legend might have confused the start of the process with the result of the process. Even so, S.A. Barnett, the first archaeologist who studied Aztalan, a site near the mines, believed that the miners originated from Europe. His conclusion was largely based on the type of tools that had been used, tools which were not used by the local people.

3000 BC and maybe further back in time, massive amounts of Copper where removed. How?

But that it could very well be Europe, was given a boost when in 1922, William A. Ferguson discovered a harbour on the north coast of Isle Royale. Ships could load and unload, aided by a pier that measured 500 metres in length. This suggests that the type of ships that anchored here, were large ships – and that there were many. The most likely explanation as to the purpose of this harbour was that they formed the point where the copper was loaded… to be transported to other regions. The presence of the harbour further shows that the people working the mines were not local, as the local Indians only used small canoes.

Now, this area could pose to be a problem for some. The most Purest Source of Copper on the Planet, (again "picked" by GOD) that seems to indicate there was NO Native Population involved outside of maybe a labour source. Native American Peoples indicating this specifically. And the lack of evidence found on the continent of North America or Central and South America for that matter, to show where the majority of the copper was used.

Although, there is a marketplace, yet again, just down the Stream/River that leads to the Vessels which carried the copper to the Old World to support the "Bronze Age" and it's Peoples.

Ciao for now.

Shane

Originally posted by coredrill
Now Now..The discussion is going so far away from the topic.
could you folks get back to the discussion please?

I wish to express my apologies Coredrill, if that is what YOU discern the discussion is currently heading.

I don't quite see it that way myself, since all that is being presented to the Nay Sayers is evidence that suggests this Hemisphere has had interactions from MANY other Peoples from around this globe.

You may present your remarkable conclusions, and offer your humble opinion on the Premise laidout in the Opening of this Thread, but that isn't going to just "fly" with everyone in this site.

Their open dismissal has been presented since the first Posts started to flow.

They can not be argued with, since they position themselves behind the "prove it" aspect.

Since that isn't something you are likely to indicate, certified in a Journal of Science, and Peer Reviewed, the alternative is to lay out overwhelming complimentary evidence that others have had the ability in the past to have made such ventures, "Overseas".

It is the "General Reviewer" of this thread, who has no preconceived premise already imposed, that is best served in Thread's such as this. They can review and then take what it is you have presented as something to actually consider, since the mindset of prove it, has way to many things to deny.

My background is Christian, and from mainly the U.K. I tend to direct my train of thought toward those areas first and foremost, but that does not mean these Ancient Interactions are specifically European or Mid East Alone.

I am going to begin directing attention towards the Pacific Fleets that arrived here as well, since there is evidence that suggests this was case from both sides of the globe.

I personally think Egypt alone was here via the Pacific around 2400 BC. Not to forget the Chinese and Islanders of the Pacific Rim, but we'll get to that in time.

The items you are presenting are fascinating to consider. There is OBVIOUSLY some connection that explains this, and that of course is what you are seeking.

Anyways, I just wished to express this for you, and the others who maybe reviewing this Thread. It may appear the topic has gone astray, but it hasn't. It's just gone off a bit to build on the notion that current "history" is maybe not all that historically accurate as created "history" wishes some to believe.

I hope you see this point of view, my friend.

Ciao

Shane

While being adjusted to another open body of water, and the Peoples from the "Pacific Rim" and Asia, and looking at what evidence there is to support the contentious issue of interaction between Ancient Cultures from those noted areas to the Americas, I found another "History" commentary which clearly expresses the sad fact of it.

As we see with Martin Doutre's book Ancient Celtic New Zealand, such misunderstandings are destructive towards intelligent dailogue on the subject of our hidden histories. Every country has a past history that is different to the culture that is present there today. We must all accept that and move on. For the ignorant it may be easier to erase the past so that it does not confuse. This has been done many times in the past - the burning of the Library of Alexandria by Caesar, the burning of the library of Carthage, the burning of books by the Catholics in Italy, Spain and Mexico. Even the illiterate Incas were guilty of destroying the writing system of the people of Peru. All these atrocities have made us ignorant of our rich and wonderful past which connects cultures around the world during past periods of globalization.

I thought it should be offered, since ATS is the area where the Moniker, "Ignorance Denied" seems to flourish. This is a fine reminder on how the History we currently have, became the status quo.

I also found an answer to something I have always wondered about. What sort of Timeframe are we talking about in regards to the fabulous finds being located in the Ocean's Tidal Regions of the Globe's Coastline.

Sadly, this comes from someone of high esteem here, ( ) that being Graham Hancock.

The East Asian civilization commonly known as the Jomon civilization was around from 16,000 years ago to 6,000 years ago, the Solutreans/Magdalenians/Atlanteans/Red heads were around from 18,000 years ago to 6,000 years ago, Graham Hancock in his book 'Underworld', he points out that the RigVeda speaks of learning academies 16,000 years ago. All this suggests that world civilization at this time was on a global basis and far more advanced than we have given them credit for. Interestingly, we have; Cro magnon man centred on the tropic of Cancer in the Carribean and flourishing on the shores of the Atlantic; the Veda, centred on the Tropic of Cancer near the Indus River and flourishing on the shores of the Indian Ocean; and the proto-Polynesians, centred on the Tropic of Cancer in Taiwan and flourishing on the shores of the Pacific Ocean. During these golden years, there was plenty of land and food for everybody, cultures benefitted from each other through trade, everyone spoke the same language - most probably the Na Dene language which is still found in America and North Africa and is a relic of Atlantis. The Na Dene language also has many similarities with Ainu language, possibly showing the extent of globalization at this time. (Interestingly Ainu genes are more closely related to native American genes containing the Caucasian haplotype X than European Caucasians - suggesting migration westward via America).The survivors of these ancient civilizations were spiritually aware, honest peace loving people. Trickery, deceit and war had no place in their culture. These qualities can still be seen in survivors of this age; the Ainu, Australian Aborigine, native Americans and the spiritually aware Veda and were once a very trusting people.

Now, I never had considered this previously, so the Tropic of Cancer aspect is new to me. I clearly can see why the evidence does support this, and frankly that is interesting to me. It also affords some answers to other questions I have had, but that's another post for another time.

So, we see a period of time, I have always considered to be about 14000 BC based solely upon Aboriginal Lore, but it fits what Hancock seems to surmise. 16000 BC to 6000 BC and again, we have Cultures that appear "intelligent" beyond our common assumptions, that also show evidence of being here, on this Hemisphere, coming via the Pacific.

The above notations came from [url=http://users.on.net/~mkfenn/page8.htm[Ancient Asia[/url] link which has quite a bit of material to consider.

Ciao

Shane

I also found the following List in this link Ancient Asia which offers an awful lot of evidence to suggest Visitations took place, and they is quite a list.

The following information is on Asian influences in America, compiled by James L. Guthrie.

Exploration of the Pacific seems to have been well underway by the third millennium B.C., tropical Asian parasites, Jômon-like pottery, monumental architecture, and various Oceanic traits had appeared in western South America. Numerous effects on language have been claimed, including impressive recent findings by Foster (1998) of lexical elements shared by Austronesian and Quechua as well as by Mixe-Zoquean. Previously, Imbelloni (1928b) had claimed that Quechua seemed to be 30% Polynesian and linguist Christian (1923) had argued for a Sanskrit influence on Araucanian, all paralleling the genetic evidence.
Dates given by Ibarra Grasso (1982) for transpacific influences, based on decades of study, are a little before 3000 B.C. (from Indonesia to Ecuador and Mexico) plus three more waves to Ecuador, Peru, and Mexico from various Asian sources at 1800-1500 B.C., 1000-700 B.C., and about 500 B.C. Tolstoy (1974) compiled an extensive list of traits that seem to have been transmitted from Southeast Asia to South America, and a similar list for Mesoamerica. McLean (1979) listed 38 musical traits shared by Asia, Oceania, and America, including the musical bow, panpipes, and the slit drum. Many others have compiled comparative trait lists, including Nordenskiöld (1924, 1933), MacLeod (1929), and Campbell (1983-89).
Perhaps the most thoroughly analyzed traits are bark-cloth technology (Tolstoy 1963, 1966), blowguns (Friederici 1915; Jett 1970, 1991), ceramics (Meggers, Evans, and Estrada 1965; Stocker 1991), and calendrics (Kelley 1960). Schobinger (1956) examined the distribution of Mapuche ceremonial batons that have the same form as those of Polynesia, and Heine-Geldern (1958) reported stone sarcophagi at San Augustín, Colombia, that are much like those of Java, other Indonesian islands, and Taiwan. Key (1964) noted unusual resin-glazing of pottery made by the Cavineño (Tacana) Indians of Bolivia, a process also used in Burma and by Austronesians of North Borneo, Fiji, New Caledonia, and the Philippines. Other detailed comparisons have been made of clubs (Skinner 1974) and music (panpipes, bow, trumpet, nose flute, mouth harp, (M. Ling 1961). See also the world “song map” of Lomax and Erickson (1968). Some shared traits have ancient roots, while others, such as ikat dyeing, may not have been present in America for more than about a thousand years (VanStan 1957; Jett 1999a).
Studies of mummies and coprolites have established the presence of tropical intestinal parasites, especially Ancylostoma duodenale, in ancient South America; They were present at; Tio da Pedra Furada (Brazil) by 5000 B.C. This suggests a direct entry via the tropics into south America, as the parasite would not have survived it's lifecycle in transit via the Bering land bridge.
Glenn Whitley (1974a, 1974b) argued for transfer of southern Asian traits to eastern Brazil through Madagascar and South Africa, partly on the basis of Arawak and Tupi names for the fulvous tree duck and for the jangada raft, that are very similar to the Asian names. Details of duck domestication, fishing techniques, and blowgun use are similar as well. Others have claimed that Indonesian traits extended to West Africa (Hutton 1946; Jones 1964) and from there to America (Buhler 1946, comparing ikat reserve dyeing in Madagascar and America; Marschall 1972 and Jett 1970, 1991, comparing blowguns). Also, Solheim (1968) suggested that Madagascar provided the link for puzzling trait similarities in Africa, certain Pacific islands, and South America. Madagascar is known to have been colonized from Indonesia by at least A.D. 400 and probably significantly earlier.

to be continued...

Ciao

Shane

Continued...............

Some workers have long noted the resemblance of Melanesian crania to those from the Fuegan region, Lower California, and parts of Amazonia, but the probable principal explanation is that the earliest Americans were part of an expansion that also populated Melanesia and Australia. Skeletons from Lagoa Santa (Brazil) with apparent Melanesian aspects date to 9500-8000 years ago (Guidon 1992) and Kate (1884). However, voyagers from Melanesia may have reached America at much later dates as well. Lehmann (1930) thought Melanesian influence accounted for “Negroid” traits in certain populations of California, Panama, coastal Venezuela, and Colombia (San Augustín). Rivet (1925) compared the Fuegan Tson (Chon) languages to those of Australia, and Loukotka (1948) claimed vestigial Australian traits in languages of the Alakaluf, Puelche, and Araucano-Mapuche (but not Yahgan). Swadesh (1961) put common origins back 5000 to 18,000 years. “Melanesian” traits noted in South America include bow culture, basketry, use of lime with narcotic plants, masks, axes, fire drills, pile dwellings, and horticultural practices (Graebner 1909; Nordenskiöld 1920; Koppers 1930; Ibarra Grasso 1961; and others). Musical similarities such as details of panpipe design and pitch seem especially valuable. Von Hornbostel (1936) likened Fuegan songs to those of Australia, Ceylon, and the Andaman Islands. Most, but probably not all, “Australoid” traits came with very early colonization along the Asian and American coasts.

Contemporary genetic and linguistic studies are beginning to demonstrate an important but unrecognized early connection spreading from India to Japan and eastern Africa , reaching Peru and Ecuador by 3500B.C. León (1994) has published a summary updated to include virological and genetic (mitochondrial DNA, HLA) data supporting arrival by sea in South America of Jômon people about 3000 B.C.
A previously unsuspected center of expansion from the Sea of Japan” that “might have been responsible for a migration to the Americas”. This migration seems to have reached Colombia, as shown by the data of Zamora et al. (1990) and Miura et al. (1994), who found the same rare variety of HTLV-I virus in Japan and among isolated Paez tribes of Colombia. Miura et al.’s interpretation is that two lineages (A and B) were carried anciently from India to Japan, but that only lineage A reached America. Lineage A is now found among the Paez, the Ainu, and the people of the Ryukyu Islands. I think two movements from Japan may have occurred, one during Middle Jômon times and another about 600 B.C., bringing Near-Eastern traits. Beirne (1971) had discussed star-shaped and ring maces as well as the method of hafting, as evidence for direct influence from Japan.
The Zuni provide another example of a more recent arrival from Japan. Several kinds of information, including genetic, linguistic, and dental, as well as tradition, indicate that they assimilated a Japanese component in the 13th century (Davis 2000). The Zuni have the same HLA subtype B*3501 as the Japanese (Belich et al. 1992).Theodore G. Schurr.

The Nahua are genetically nearly identical to the Cherokee. Spuhler (1979) found that the Cherokee were allied with Hokan speakers, especially the Diegueño of California. His data appear to generate the cluster: Cherokee, Diegueño, Maricopa, Pima, Papago, and Zuni.
The Ipiutak Eskimos, who are undoubtedly part of the Circum Polar culture, have art styles that have been called “Scythio-Siberian” like those of the lower Ob region of the late first millennium B.C. (Larsen and Rainey 1948, Schuster 1952; Rainey 1971).

Chinese and American artistic traits involve technology and customs pertaining to jade and metals (Balser 1968; Towle 1973), ceramic house models (Lehman 1964; von Winning 1971; Gartelmann 1986), geomancy (Heyden 1981), specific breeds and uses of dogs and chickens (Fiennes and Fiennes 1968; Carter 1971; Johannessen, Fogg, and Fogg 1984), mirrors (Probst 1963; Jett 1983), and panpipes (Pan L. C. 1963; Marschall 1966; Teikener 1977). These traits are concentrated on the west coasts of Mesoamerica, Ecuador, and Peru, but seem to have arrived over an extended period. Needham et al. said that significant Chinese influence began about 700 B.C. and continued to A.D. 1600.

To be continued.............

Ciao

Shane

Mirrors were known in China by 2600 B.C., and comparable devices appeared at Huaca Prieta, Peru, about 2500 B.C., then at La Venta, Mexico (Probst 1963). Mexican mirrors of similar antiquity are now known from Olmec San Lorenzo and from Oaxaca. However, these may reflect indirect Mesopotamian rather than Chinese voyages. Distinctive forms of Chinese “ancestor stones,” carried to Indonesia and Japan as well, apparently did not appear in Mesoamerica until about 1000 B.C. (Lou 1971) and ceramic house models are later, first appearing in Ecuador about 200 B.C. (von Winning 1969).

In numerous publications, Barthel (e.g., 1974, 1981, 1982), proposed an Indian and Indonesian base for religious and calendric concepts, as did Heine-Geldern and Ekholm (1951) and Giesing (1984). The most convincing demonstrations are probably those involving calendars and deities from the Indian system of lunar mansions (Kelley 1960, 1974, 1975; Stewart 1974). The Mesoamerican calendar is likely to have come from Northwest India about 400-100 B.C. A similar system is still in use in Java and Bali (Barthel 1973). Similar influences seem to have reached Ecuador, perhaps as early as 500 B.C. (Gartelmann 1986).

Mesoamerican art, architecture, and religious practices have remarkable parallels in India. Among these are mudras (Martí 1971; Medvedov 1982), ritual use of shell trumpets (Jackson 1916; Vokes 1963), medical uses of the Asiatic black-boned chicken (Johannessen, Fogg, and Fogg 1984), and details of the hook-swinging rite (Hewitt 1894; MacLeod 1934). Turbans like those of specific regions of India were used in Mexico by 2000 years ago (Smith 1924), and the distribution of turban types elsewhere in America—for example in the southeastern United States—might give clues to later population movements.

Traits of apparent Indian or East Asian origin also appear in South America. These include Peruvian methods of hafting axes (Bierne 1971); textile technology (Silow 1949), including Peruvian tie-Dying (Kerr 1921; Jett 1999a); presence of, and customs regarding, various Asian chickens (Carter 1971); and traditions regarding the nose flute that are similar in India, Bali, Sulawesi, Tahiti, and Mato Grosso (Werner 1973).
There is evidence as well for backflow of Mayan influence to Indochina, India, and westward to Europe between the fifth and eighth centuries A.D., especially in the form of early presence of maize in Indonesia, Nepal, Tibet, Bhutan, and parts of India (Stonor and Anderson 1949; Koppers 1953; Gupta and Jain 1973; Vishnu-Mittre 1974; Johannessen 1989, 1998; Johannessen and Parker 1989; Sachan and Sarkar 1986). The early Asian maizes appear to be the smaller, “primitive” varieties and not the “Caribbean” type later carried to South Asia by the Portuguese.
The five Andean samples with HLA data are somewhat diverse. Araucanians are farthest from the others. Some investigators have noted traits reminiscent of the European Paleolithic among populations of southernmost South America (Juan Schobinger in Greenman [1963:82]). The Araucanians also possess Oceanian cultural traits, according to several investigators. The Mapuche are a subgroup of Araucanians who seem genetically intermediate between the Araucano of Chile and Andeans farther north. Mapuche sample is closer to the Araucanian sample than to others. Aymara and Atacama samples are statistically indistinguishable from one another, despite the different language families of the peoples (Andean and Paez). They are both genetically very unlike the Araucanians. The Quechua composite data from Ecuador, Bolivia, and Peru, showed these populations vary considerably. This puzzled Mourant (1976), who apparently did not realize that the Inca had imposed the Quechua language on diverse populations. The use of mixed Quechua data makes them seem central to the others. There was a general migration southward during the Inca expansion, which the Araucanians were able to resist. Two other groups from the Titicaca region, the Chipaya (Uru) and the Calchaqui (Diaguita) lack HLA data but are known to have other “non-Indian” genes.

And I will throw in the following for much deserved consideration

James L. Guthrie and all the scientists mentioned above will hopefully be given credit for their detailed work, which as a whole, paints a wonderfully detailed picture of America's past, unlike the narrow minded isolationist theorists that choose to ignore 99% of the above information. As we can see migrations in the past have been many, whether through trade or as colonizers, we may never know, but one thing is for certain - extensive oceanic travel has been going on for a very long time.

All of these last few pages are from the Ancient Asia link I offered earlier.

Quite an account of Trans Pacific Influence, to support the OP's consideration

Ciao

Shane

Originally posted by Shane
Speaking of Copper, there is a remarkable site, that should also be presented in this effort to suggest the OP's Thread has merit and that it is viable, both of these Cultures had (or quite plausibly had) interaction which explains the reasoning behind such Constructional Similarities.

I believe I stated that I was ready to debunk this.
A paper by the Michigan state archaeologist (in the 1990's, IIRC,) Susan R. Martin, notes that the figures bandied about for the amount of copper mined there are complete fabrications. Again, Doug's Archaeology site.
Here's your source for the claim about the quantity mined:

In Prehistoric Copper Mining in the Lake Superior Region, published in 1961, Drier and Du Temple estimated that over 1.5 billion pounds of copper had been mined from the region. However, David Johnson and Susan Martin contend that their estimate was based on exaggerated and inaccurate assumptions.[7][8]

Source: Wiki
Martin's name comes up again there also, as well as David Johnson. You should at the very least read his article about this culture here. I'd quote him for you, but I'm already running out of characters.

You can find this info here at ATS already posted by a younger version of myself. The repetition is yawn-inspiring.

The part of Coppens' article you quote (below) about Ferguson' claim is not even mentioned in her article. Wouldn't you think that's odd?

Originally posted by Shane

But that it could very well be Europe, was given a boost when in 1922, William A. Ferguson discovered a harbour on the north coast of Isle Royale. Ships could load and unload, aided by a pier that measured 500 metres in length. This suggests that the type of ships that anchored here, were large ships – and that there were many.

Martin does mention Ferguson in her book, "Wonderful Power: The Story of Ancient Copper Working in the Lake Superior Basin." Unfortunately, the book is still for sale and Google books only provides a few pages for preview. If this link works like it's supposed to, it'll take you to snippets of her three mentions of Ferguson in that book: LINK

Here's a quote from Martin's book that concerns Ferguson:

Fred Dustin put his critique of Ferguson kindly: "Perhaps his enthusiasm misled him somewhat."

Who was Fred Dustin?

Fred Dustin was a writer focusing on the American West, in particular George Armstrong Custer and The Battle of the Little Bighorn.

In 1887, he moved to Saginaw, Michigan, and became a carpenter and building contractor. His passion was studying the Indian culture and history of his area, and he was an archaeological surveyor for the University of Michigan and an amateur archaeologist. ...
He conducted an archaeological survey of Isle Royale from 1929 until 1930. Dustin published some of the earliest sketches of the Ogemaw Earthworks and other Saginaw sites associated with the Mound builders in 1931.

Source: Wiki
Given that I've never been able to find any corroboration of the existence of such a pier as Ferguson claimed, and given that I've looked at pretty much every piece of info about this subject on the internet that's free (I ain't payin',) I seriously doubt the veracity of the claim.
Do you blame me?

You gotta hand it to Coppens, though, assuming he didn't just get the story from one of his fellow fringe authors (a prime example of incestuous phony "journalists" if you ask me - constantly having relations with each others claims like mix-and-match.) This claim of a pier is very rare, and you know that if I'm anything, I'm a connoisseur of fringe claims. Coppens picked a good one in that it is not easily debunked from a computer keyboard.

Re. the comment by Coppens asking how they could possibly smelt the metal from the ore, he's lying to you, or he's ignorant.

The copper there is, as you state, pure. In fact, it is native raw copper exposed to the air by glaciers. To this day, raw copper can be picked up off the ground in the area.
Here's a pic of what it looks like, taken almost at the shore of Lake Erie, likely a copper boulder deposited by the same glaciers that exposed it on Isle Royale.


Apparently, you like making me work during my time off.

Harte

reply to post by Harte


I just read something interesting that perhaps applies.
Criteria For Determining Hebrew Writing
When archeologists are studying Israeli artifacts, they follow this criteria

first, that it was written in what is called a national Hebrew script, which, however, only emerged in the ninth century B.C.E.; and, second, that its language is Hebrew, spoken from an earlier period than the emergence of the Hebrew national script, as witnessed by certain early Biblical passages.

Ok, so you will dismiss my source because it is by a Biblical Archeology Society. But the standards for criteria apply for secular archeologists as well.

“Another factor,” he writes, “that can be important in determining the language of an inscription is provenance: Where did the inscription come from?” However, he qualifies this additional factor by noting that “provenance should normally not be the sole means of identifying what language a text is written in.”

So when you see inscriptions that have a pre-modern Hebrew text and assume it must be something else, you are limiting yourself by not understanding the evolution of modern Hebrew writing that came about during the time of the Babylonian captivity. Amos was responsible for this change from proto-Hebrew to modern Hebrew.

And the question is provenance. How DID they get there?

Even though the article is about finding inscriptions in Israel and Phoenicia, the same thought applies to artifacts found in the Americas.

These closely related dialects—not including Hebrew as spoken in Judah—share the linguistic feature of the contraction of the diphthong (two vowels like ai usually pronounced ay). In these dialects the diphthong is compressed or contracted so that it sounds like a long e.

Suppose then that the dialects were different from the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah, that maybe perhaps those most close to Phoenicia might have been the writers of inscriptions here, by virtue of provenance? Certainly it is worth a thought.

Originally posted by WarminIndy
reply to post by Harte

 

I just read something interesting that perhaps applies.
Criteria For Determining Hebrew Writing
When archeologists are studying Israeli artifacts, they follow this criteria

first, that it was written in what is called a national Hebrew script, which, however, only emerged in the ninth century B.C.E.; and, second, that its language is Hebrew, spoken from an earlier period than the emergence of the Hebrew national script, as witnessed by certain early Biblical passages.

Ok, so you will dismiss my source because it is by a Biblical Archeology Society. But the standards for criteria apply for secular archeologists as well.

“Another factor,” he writes, “that can be important in determining the language of an inscription is provenance: Where did the inscription come from?” However, he qualifies this additional factor by noting that “provenance should normally not be the sole means of identifying what language a text is written in.”

I wouldn't dismiss a Biblical Archaeologist where reading Hebrew is concerned. That would be insane, IMO.

However, did you even read this?

Carets and the like are not unknown in antiquity. []b]But the upside down V mark does not appear in any Hebrew text before Medieval times. It may appear in Codex Sinaiticus (I have not had the chance to check yet), but it does not occur in Hebrew texts.
The caret mark in the Los Lunas inscription has a peculiarity about it. There is a dot underneath it, a period at the end of a sentence. This dot and others like it are the most crucial pieces of evidence that Los Lunas was written by someone who did not know ancient writing techniques. Prior to the turn of the turn of the era, Hebrew used dots not as markers for the end of a sentence but as word-dividers.

As you indicate, there are things that are known about ancient writing systems, in this case Hebrew.

The Las Lunas stone does not fit with what is known, as you should be able to see above.

What you are saying is that it is acceptable to invent a different ancient Hebrew script that nobody has ever seen before, and then state that the Las Lunas stone is an example of this.

Too much of a stretch. I mean, you could say that about any claim, no matter how outrageous. Using this logic, I could assert that the Moon is made of cheese, or that there is a teapot in orbit around Pluto, to name a couple of well-known examples.

Harte

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by WarminIndy

I wouldn't dismiss a Biblical Archaeologist where reading Hebrew is concerned. That would be insane, IMO.

However, did you even read this?

Carets and the like are not unknown in antiquity. []b]But the upside down V mark does not appear in any Hebrew text before Medieval times. It may appear in Codex Sinaiticus (I have not had the chance to check yet), but it does not occur in Hebrew texts.
The caret mark in the Los Lunas inscription has a peculiarity about it. There is a dot underneath it, a period at the end of a sentence. This dot and others like it are the most crucial pieces of evidence that Los Lunas was written by someone who did not know ancient writing techniques. Prior to the turn of the turn of the era, Hebrew used dots not as markers for the end of a sentence but as word-dividers.

As you indicate, there are things that are known about ancient writing systems, in this case Hebrew.

The Las Lunas stone does not fit with what is known, as you should be able to see above.

What you are saying is that it is acceptable to invent a different ancient Hebrew script that nobody has ever seen before, and then state that the Las Lunas stone is an example of this.

Too much of a stretch. I mean, you could say that about any claim, no matter how outrageous. Using this logic, I could assert that the Moon is made of cheese, or that there is a teapot in orbit around Pluto, to name a couple of well-known examples.

Harte

The Hebrew writing we know today is not Paleo-Hebrew. And Hebrew is a Semitic language that, although linguistically is similar, is also not the same from the Northern Israel and the Southern Judah. That is Hebrew alone, but when one is writing a Semitic language, often the spelling, including jots and tittles, was left for personal understanding of the words. Just as we see today, people use texting rather than proper English spelling.

the Semitic languages, the vowels that defined meaning and grammatical structure, were not fully presented. As a result, only spelling (not the way to be read) of the written language was standardized; thus the pronunciation of the written language remained unregulated and fluid. Consequently, local languages and dialects disappeared as quickly as they appeared. The authority of written languages was often challenged by active and innovative oral languages and quickly branched out after every minor phonetic shift

It is not unreasonable that the inscriptions were indeed written by someone from a particular area, but challenged what was perceived as the authoritative written word.

Hebrew was the oldest surviving written language in the Middle East. But it did not invent the alphabetic writing; it utilized the alphabetic script from its northern Canaanite neighbors, the Phoenicians and Ugarite who arguably invented the world’s first alphabets. Both Phoenician and Ugarite died without producing an established literary tradition,

Cultural History of Evolving Semitic Languages

No one has yet to say the inscriptions were Ugartic, given the evolving history of Semitic languages and writing. Could it be possible perhaps, that maybe it was Ugartic?

Originally posted by WarminIndy
It is not unreasonable that the inscriptions were indeed written by someone from a particular area, but challenged what was perceived as the authoritative written word.

Hebrew was the oldest surviving written language in the Middle East. But it did not invent the alphabetic writing; it utilized the alphabetic script from its northern Canaanite neighbors, the Phoenicians and Ugarite who arguably invented the world’s first alphabets. Both Phoenician and Ugarite died without producing an established literary tradition,

Okay.

What this means is that maybe it's a form of Paleo Hebrew that's never been seen before. A form that uses the caret mark to indicate insertion and dots to indicate the end of a sentence, which was never seen before in any Hebrew script until Medieval times.

IOW, exactly what I said. It's too much of a stretch.

Now, if any Paleo Hebrew is found in the Levant that has similar characteristics, you may have a point.

Regarding Ugaritic, the Biblical Archaeologist (Dr. Cyrus Gordon ) you cited (and gave me a hard time for "dismissing") was an expert in Ugaritic.

Yet, as the link I gave in my response indicated, he came to believe the stone was a fraud (pious fraud, meaning it wasn't done to fool anyone, but it did.)

As an expert in Ugaritic, one would think he would have mentioned the thing being written in Ugaritic if it was. He did not, claiming it was Paleo Hebrew. Maybe he was wrong, but those guys really know the languages, even if they stretch with their conclusions because of the bias I mentioned previously.

Harte

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by WarminIndy
It is not unreasonable that the inscriptions were indeed written by someone from a particular area, but challenged what was perceived as the authoritative written word.

Hebrew was the oldest surviving written language in the Middle East. But it did not invent the alphabetic writing; it utilized the alphabetic script from its northern Canaanite neighbors, the Phoenicians and Ugarite who arguably invented the world’s first alphabets. Both Phoenician and Ugarite died without producing an established literary tradition,

Okay.

What this means is that maybe it's a form of Paleo Hebrew that's never been seen before. A form that uses the caret mark to indicate insertion and dots to indicate the end of a sentence, which was never seen before in any Hebrew script until Medieval times.

IOW, exactly what I said. It's too much of a stretch.

Now, if any Paleo Hebrew is found in the Levant that has similar characteristics, you may have a point.

Regarding Ugaritic, the Biblical Archaeologist (Dr. Cyrus Gordon ) you cited (and gave me a hard time for "dismissing") was an expert in Ugaritic.

Yet, as the link I gave in my response indicated, he came to believe the stone was a fraud (pious fraud, meaning it wasn't done to fool anyone, but it did.)

As an expert in Ugaritic, one would think he would have mentioned the thing being written in Ugaritic if it was. He did not, claiming it was Paleo Hebrew. Maybe he was wrong, but those guys really know the languages, even if they stretch with their conclusions because of the bias I mentioned previously.

Harte

Even if it is not Ugartic, it still begs the question by virtue of provenance, how did the artifacts get here? All they can say is that the writing on the inscriptions are similar to what was known in the Levant. They don't know how those artifacts came to be here, all they can offer are theories, and those theories are based in their knowledge and understanding. You and I are not experts like they are, all we can offer are theories based in their knowledge and understanding.

So we come to the conclusion that there are artifacts here that do not seem to belong here. Either we can accept theories based on educated and credentialed archeologists, or we can dismiss them entirely on the basis that they maybe, might have an agenda. That agenda needs to be proven though.

What are we left with? Can you explain the provenance?

Originally posted by WarminIndy
Even if it is not Ugartic, it still begs the question by virtue of provenance, how did the artifacts get here? All they can say is that the writing on the inscriptions are similar to what was known in the Levant. They don't know how those artifacts came to be here, all they can offer are theories, and those theories are based in their knowledge and understanding. You and I are not experts like they are, all we can offer are theories based in their knowledge and understanding.

And our understanding of Mormons.

The Decalogue is the Ten Commandments. Not exactly some obscure quote from the Torah. The writer was not an expert in Paleo Hebrew. The patina (or lack thereof) on the carved letters (admittedly not a great dating method) indicates recent creation.

So, we can obviously assume that some student of ancient Hebrew carved it. Possibly a Mormon. Recently (relatively speaking.) And not necessarily to fool anyone (except if he was Mormon.)

Harte

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by WarminIndy
Even if it is not Ugartic, it still begs the question by virtue of provenance, how did the artifacts get here? All they can say is that the writing on the inscriptions are similar to what was known in the Levant. They don't know how those artifacts came to be here, all they can offer are theories, and those theories are based in their knowledge and understanding. You and I are not experts like they are, all we can offer are theories based in their knowledge and understanding.

And our understanding of Mormons.

The Decalogue is the Ten Commandments. Not exactly some obscure quote from the Torah. The writer was not an expert in Paleo Hebrew. The patina (or lack thereof) on the carved letters (admittedly not a great dating method) indicates recent creation.

So, we can obviously assume that some student of ancient Hebrew carved it. Possibly a Mormon. Recently (relatively speaking.) And not necessarily to fool anyone (except if he was Mormon.)

Harte

Well you might could say that for the Los Lunas inscription, but not the Red Bird petroglyph in Kentucky. My family is from there and there are no Mormons or Mormon influence in that part of the country and certainly no one schooled enough to know ancient Hebrew. But the inscriptions of the Golden Tablets supposedly given to Joseph Smith is not written in Reformed Egyptian, as there is no such thing as Reformed Egyptian.

We are not just dealing with one or two artifacts, but many. On the Red Bird petroglyph, there are several languages that not only are extinct, but recently discovered and deciphered. I find it unreasonable that someone tramping through the Appalachians that were from the Appalachians were schooled in those ancient languages, because for one to see those steles and tablets containing them are still in the Levant.

The inscriptions are not random doodling or graffiti, they are actual words.

On December 7, 1994, this historic stone fell from a sandstone cliff and rolled onto Highway 66 on Lower Red Bird. On December 9, 1994, it was transported here and set up in its home. At least 8 Old World alphabets are engraved on it. These alphabets were extinct when Columbus arrived in the New World in 1492. The alphabets are first century Greek and Hebrew, Old Libyan, Old Arabic and Iberian-Punic which probably dates from the 9th century B.C. Ogam, Germanic Runes, and Tiffinag-Numidian are also on this stone.

The languages were extinct before Columbus. Do you think it is possible that someone sailed back to the Levant, studied the languages before archeology found them and then sailed back here to inscribe this in the middle of a mountain in Kentucky, as a hoax?

Originally posted by Harte

And our understanding of Mormons.
.......................................And not necessarily to fool anyone (except if he was Mormon.)

Harte

Originally posted by WarminIndy

Well you might could say that for the Los Lunas inscription, but not the Red Bird petroglyph in Kentucky. My family is from there and there are no Mormons or Mormon influence in that part of the country ........................

There seems to be Mormons taking over the Thread, and apparently the USA these days.

I was reading the following, in respects to the Los Lunas Stone, and I think this is a fair representation of the "Knowledge" available on the "Commandment Stone"

It is a Long Article, so I will place the Mormon Talk here for all to see. The balance of the material is worth review at your own leisure.

Mormon Deseret Script and Connections to Los Lunas

Before leaving script observations, I think this would be an appropriate place to consider the “Mormon Connection.” It has oft been suggested that a connection might exist between the Mormon’s early history and the carving of the Los Lunas Commandments. This is a perfectly understandable connection question and follows will all the more questions to ask.

It is my understanding that The Mormon Church did send an investigating team to the Stone and their conclusions were: 1) The stone did not have any Mormon signatures and 2) The stone was not authenticated for the age pre-Columbian historians are proposing for the stone. I would certainly enjoy reading the supportive findings for their conclusion.

As I said of the Commandment Stone; it will stick to you and will stick it to you in continually opening up avenues of knowledge not known. The Deseret Alphabet, devised by Brigham Young in or around 1851 is just such an example. I was unaware such an alphabet was ever devised. The 38 character system was actually devised to: 1) Help non-English speaker to learn English, and 2) to assist Mormon believers to be more exclusive and distinctive as a community of believers.

Young was able to construct this system through an English shorthand specialist; named, George D. Watt.

The future of the Deseret system was similar to the pouring of sidewalks before considering where people walk. Even though the sidewalks are installed, it does not insure where people will walk. After serious efforts to get the new alphabet firmly implanted in use, it finally fell in on its own weight in approximately 1869.

The period of 1851 to 1869 is a critical area for the early discovery of the Commandment Stone. We learned Dr. Frank Hibben of the University of New Mexico was led to the stone by an Indian in 1933, and by Indian testimony, the stone was there long before the history of their own Indian people. The stone was first translated successfully in 1941.

When one circles the 1830’s to the 1850’s, it is prime chronology to both Mormon and American history NOT to pose questions. Where the historical “sidewalk of eyewitnesses” summarily ends with Los Lunas (i.e. 1850’s); curiously this timing begins with the Mormon Migration. It is a cross over that; personally, I would not want to overlook.

We enter one of those areas that always tighten up historians and lovers of history’s mystery: The relationship of Doctrinal belief and an ever, ever changing world Doctrinal belief lives in. The Mormon Church has contributed hugely to American religious life. Though exclusive in their doctrinal convictions/connections with ancient Israel, I have rarely (if never) heard one acknowledge them as the first “diffusionists” historians when it comes to the history of Ancient Americas. They embraced that conclusion long before such pioneers who expanded the historical possibilities for the Americas. With such groundbreaking giants as Dr. Cyrus Gordon, Dr. Barry Fells, and Gloria Farley: 1) the Mormon community may have had only convictions of only Hebrew origins; but now we see Celtic, Iberic, Punic, Egyptian, Greek, Roman, and Lord only knows what more). And 2) Like the Mormon conclusion; they arrived long before Columbus.

Space??

Ciao

Shane

reply to post by Shane


Continued.........from the The Commandment Stone

The Deseret alphabet and the syllabary of the Commandment stone have only one connecting character, but it is one that raises my attention. In the Deseret script, the letter N is a perfect match to the Los Lunas Commandment stone. That is a scant miniscule of any significant connect; however, it does turn over yet another stone with an even bigger question on it: Did early and colonial America know paleo or proto-Hebrew script? Without question, the first migrants to American soil knew Hebrew, but “modern” Masoretic Hebrew. In the Deseret alphabet, there are two perfect matches to ancient Hebrew script in the letters L and N; L being the shephard’s crook symbol and N being that lightening bolt of a symbol. Los Lunas does not use the shephard’s crook, rather, turns to Greek script. What is the trace on this letters? In the Mormon community, I would love to see someone pursue that; someone like the wonderful scholarship provided by Dr. Brian Stubbs. What Dr. Stubbs has contributed to is the awesome connection between Hebrew consonal roots (and Hebrew plural construction) to languages of both ancient America; especially Indian languages squarely in the Los Lunas matrix. Another scholarly contribution in this area of Hebrew root connections and Ancient Americas is David Deal’s work in Mayan syllabary and words.

I can only venture a suggestion and that is, these two letters came through England. I don’t know what Watt’s shorthand symbols were he was skilled in, but the origins strongly point there. The overwhelming number of Phoenician and Greek letters and words found in Los Lunas are more of a direct link to Old World (Bronze Age) employ. Again, though there are some dating overlaps seen between Los Lunas and Mormon migration; I really believe the Mormons were far to the north of the Los Lunas location. From the 1840’s to the end of the 1850’s, the concentration was on the Great Utah Basin and their early establishment in the area. Finally, I do not see a strong connection in the Inscription Stone and the Mormon community for the simple reason, there is not the faintest hint (even a sign pointer) to any Christian Confession. The Mormon faith, nor any of the array of Christian denominations; especially, of early American age would omit such an opportunity for Christological profession.

So, it would appear the Mormon aspect Harte has NO basis of being a consideration when the Paint Stroke of Denial is applied to This Stone of Testament to the All Mighty GOD.

I also found this, which speaks VOLUMES when discussing such matters.

What is never taken up by any academic scholarship is what the Commandment Stone points to. Such a direction is to be avoided because it is “religious” and anything religious has no historical credibility or factual merit. When in fact, what this author leaves behind is considered even more valuable than his own name, where he comes from, and why. It is the radical nature of these ideas presented that the Stone presents directly rather than through layers of Western Greco-Roman-European interpolation.

Anyhow, I hope we can get the Mormons out of this thread now, and put them in the Oval Office. (Take that DEMONCRATS ) , and work to help the OP discuss the Thread Topic, and the Shared Past, that many of the peoples of this globe seem to have.

Ciao

Shane

The reason I mentioned Mormons at all was because if the fraud was done by a Mormon, then it likely wouldn't be called "pious."

IOW, Mormons are well known for fabricating "evidence" that tends to corroborate their religious mythos.

I don't know if a Mormon did it. I do know that, whoever did it, they used an insertion character (caret) and some periods in ways that have never been seen in paleo Hebrew.

Harte